Claim in relation to at least two ways of knowing

We enchant and substantiate things not as they atomic number 18 but as we are. argue this claim in relation to at least two ways of knowing. Many things we fore butt against and empathise shtup be asked by the fraternity we live in, the beliefs we have, and our perceptions of the world. What I am going to try and do in this essay is discuss whether we befool things and understand things not as they are, but as we are. In this essay, I will discuss some(prenominal) external factors which come across people and, in that locationfore, interfere with of way of curbing and intelligence. in that location are several(prenominal) issues to be discussed which arse affect the way kind-hearted beings understand and see hings.There are sociologists, like David myocardial infarct Durkheim, who state that golf-club is supreme over the individual. By saying this he wants to lay down us the power the order exerts on the individual. This may lead to a change in perception, and the way the individual will see and understand things. There are several ways of knowing, there is a diddle term P E A R L (Perception, Emotion, Reason, Language). Therefore, the society the individual lives on, the language he speaks, and cultural habits involving religion, will definitely affect the way the individual understand things.We see several issues in this groundbreaking world which can prove my statement above. As some of you may know, Israel and Palestine have been in conflict for more than one snow now. The individuals living in both societies, even though they are precise close to each other (in terms of distance), the way they see and understand things are very different, very far away from each other. A individual raised inside Israel will belike have the identical beliefs the others in the society do, and therefore would protect the cause of Israel against Palestine. As David mile Durkheim, famous French sociologist says, society is supreme over the indi vidual.This equal situation happening with the individual in Israel will also happen, contempt differently, with the individual in Palestine. This individual in Palestine will probably believe his god is Allah, and that the Israelis are intruders into their grime. This clearly shows us that due to their remnant in cultural backgrounds, and beliefs, creates 2 very distinguishable ways of seeing and judgment things, which in this case ended up in a conflict which have already resulted in the deaths of over 110 000 people, which is the same umber of people living in Charleston (US).In this situation the distinct way of seeing and understanding things have generated this war, however there are others situation where people try to understand the others way of understanding in harmony. It is also possible to have different ways of seeing and understanding things inside the same country. As we can see, in Brazil there are over 67 tribes, in which they speak their own language, and dedicate their own rituals. It is certain that the vast majority of these Indians dont share the same beliefs as the people living in he big cities (e. g. Rio de Janeiro).The Brazilian society as a whole accept these ditterences, and there is no contlict in between them, only in some separate cases dealing with territory utility, or other specific reason. There are even several sociologists, and some environmentalists which try understanding them, and their culture, and also protect their territory so that they can be enabled to continue with their normal lifes. However this relationship with the innate Braszilian tribes has not always been like this, from 1500 to 1900 it is estipulated that over 200 000 natives ave been killed.In early old age there were little access to ways of knowledge, and communication was very difficult. These could be one of the factors determining on this occupation. What I wanted to show by using this Brazilian tribes interpreter, was that the differenc e in ways of seeing and understanding things dont necessarily cause conflict. The natives share distinct perception from the world, they practice an extremely unique method which varies from tribe to tribe, and therefore they would see certain things we see as normal, with other eyes.For example when there is rain, ome tribes, like the Tupis, believe it is an assign from god so that they can raise some more crops. interim and individual from the city would see it as a normal thing, as a natural element from the precipitation cycle. Culture and religion is know for distorting our visual perception. This is, seeing things not as they are, but as we are. They affect directly on the formation of the individuals, and build them up in localize to believe in their own way.Plato, a very famous philosopher, school-age child of Socrates which was born in Greece, developed an allegory, known as The Cave. Plato imagined individuals living in an underground cave, with their legs and neck cha ined so that they could not move. Behind them was a fire, which would reflect them on the opposite wall of the cave. Puppet players would play with their puppets on front of the fire, so that the shadows created by it were reflected on the wall.The people passing through and through the cave entrance talking would generate an echo which the individuals living on the cave would believe were coming from the shadows on the wall. Until one day, one captive is taken off the cave, and shown the real world, he hen realizes that all the things he believed were actually illusions, and werent true. When the prisoner who was set free returned to the cave to tell the other about the truth, they didnt believed him, and killed him because they felt offended. Platos theory of the cave is a perfect example of individuals seeing things not as they are but as we are.It shows the disturb of the society, which would blindly believe those shadows were true, and would refuse to open their mind, as if t hey were formed by it. Now a day, there are different caves perhaps what we see as real, and would laim it is true, could be only an illusion. Therefore, as a conclusion we can see that by Joining up the three example given, we can say that the individual are extremely modify by the society they live on, the religious beliefs they have, and therefore the individual will not see things as they are but as they are.The formation of the individuals is extremely affected by these exteriors factors which will certainly distort their image of what is real and what isnt. As said before, all of us could be living inside a cave, and we don t has access to the real true. Due to that, the claim we see nd understand things not as they are but as we are could be said to be true even though many would go against it claiming that their beliefs are the right ones, similar situation to the prisoners on the cave.